In a speech at Hillsdale College, investigative journalist Sheryl Atkisson reported on the well-known and growing problems conservative publishers are having with the liberal social media giant Facebook, which is on a clear mission to shut down conservative discourse on its site completely. Add Twitter and Google (which includes YouTube) to this cabal and you have an evil conspiracy to shred the United States Constitution, which guarantees free speech for EVERYONE, not just liberals.

Despite a little tough talk (very little) during Congress’ questioning of Fascistbook chief Mark Zuckerberg earlier this week regarding his site’s documented restriction of conservative speech, the restriction not only continues, but according to Powdered Wig’s traffic metrics, has worsened. Facebook explains this phenomenon as “algorithm changes.” Uh-huh.

Facebook claims to be all about accurate reporting and fighting “fake news,” which in Silicon Valley translates to “conservative opinion.”

Among Facebook’s most recent initiatives to combat conservative opinion, I mean fake news, is to hire a like-minded assortment of what they refer to as “fact checkers,” an objective-enough sounding title until you find out who they are. Included in the assortment are well-known liberal tools Snopes and PolitiFact.

I know money comes easy to the powers that be at Facebook but I simply don’t understand why they are paying these clowns to fact check conservative sources when the Democrat Party will do it for free.

From BizPac Review

Sheryl Attkisson, the former D.C. bureau investigative correspondent for CBS News, revealed Facebook’s “new plan to crack down on fake news.”

Coming the same week Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg was being grilled on Capitol Hill about bias at the social media platform, Attkisson reveals that the “fact checkers” they are turning to, or the organizations behind them, are guilty themselves of peddling fake news.

Speaking at Hillsdale College this week, she exposed Zuckerberg and Co. more than a few grandstanding senators ever did.

“Facebook’s new plan to help crack down on fake news included collaborating with Pointer Institute’s “PolitiFact,” ABC News’, The Associated Press and Snopes,” Attkisson explained.

Excerpted from a 2016 Powdered Wig article:

A year ago I published an article regarding Swedish vigilantes taking matters into their own hands, torching Muslim refugee centers in protest to the Muslim invasion underway in their country and all over Europe. My article went viral, receiving over one million page views the first day alone.

Snopes’ response was that Powdered Wig is “sleazy” because the featured photo I used in the article, which I obtained from my source, Jews News, was a generic photo of a fire in Sweden (a landfill) as they apparently were not able to find a photo of an actual fire of a Swedish Muslim refugee center. The use of stock photos in lieu of unavailable photos is also common journalistic practice.

Snopes labeled my entire article FALSE because the photo was not an actual Swedish Muslim refugee center burning, even though the content of the article was 100% accurate, and the true point of the story.

So, I dug through local Swedish newspapers and found several photos of Swedish Muslim refugee centers burning at the hands of the same Swedish vigilantes in my article. I then edited the article to remove the original photo and included the new featured photo. The response from the asshats at Snopes…. crickets.

“Now this audience probably already knows the possible perils of all that from a neutrality standpoint,” she continued. “Its relying on some of the very organizations that have gotten caught in compromising situations or engaged in transactional journalism or reported biased and incorrect news themselves.”

Attkisson went on to detail specific examples to back up her claim — the testimony was damning.

“According to Facebook, each fact-checking entity would be given access to a tool to evaluate stories that may be inaccurate,” she told the audience. “If the chosen fact-checkers agree a story is misleading, the story would get a disputed label stamped on it and then an article reference explaining why it’s supposedly false.

The investigative journalist pointed to a released “field guide to fake news,” saying she looked through it.

“It included a category described as anti-liberal fake news sites, but none that were anti-conservative,” Attkisson explained.

“Apparently, under the definition used by first draft and its partners, there aren’t any left-leaning bad actors that are worthy of mention, only right,” she concluded.

But then, Diamond and Silk could have told you that — your move Mr. Zuckerberg.

Twitter responses to Atkisson’s report on the fake ‘fake news fact checkers’: